JS

iTrader: (4)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">LGM
To add to that Guys, This is a FULL weight car. 6 pt. cage, Leather seats, and she didnt even empty the glove box!

Sorry guys 3400lbs ISNT FULL WEIGHT..
STOCK WEIGHT would be 3700lbs with a cage and driver.....

The car isimpressive but 3400lbs is light
This is what it takes to run 10's with a N/A 346,A good package and light weight...

JS

TXCAMSS

iTrader: (60)

Well , I have to chime in here on the weight controversy. I personally call full weight having all the seats and interior in the car with a cage if the rules apply for that given ET. I am at 3525#s with the stock wheels and 3425#s give or take with the welds. The only real weight reductions I have are the removal of the spare tire, jack and front sway bar. My car....um... my wifes' car , came with every option available from the leather interior, t-tops, power everything to the cruise control. It all adds up. I am also referring to my SS in comparison to the TA. So , IMO a race weight of 3500#s give or take is FULL weight.

BTW- Those are some very impressive numbers and they are realistic. He should be proud.

<small>[ September 24, 2002, 07:55 PM: Message edited by: TXCAMSS ]</small>

LG Motorsports

JS,

My C5 Daytona race car is 2500 lbs. To me,(an uneducated road racer) 3400 lbs is a "Full weight" car. If it has all the leather seats, and carpet in it and she drove it to the track, it is heavy to me.
By the way, what do you think My Daytona Corvette C5 tube frame car would do in the 1/4 mile?

2500 lbs , 620rwhp @ 8200 rpms, 5 speed crash box with a 2.56 first, drag slicks, and a 4.88 gear. Peak torque is at 6700rpms

Just curious. Some of you guys must have the formula that would estimate it.

Thanks,

Lou Gigliotti LGM

<small>[ September 24, 2002, 07:56 PM: Message edited by: LG Motorsports ]</small>

Loco

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Damian:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by It'llrun:
<strong>11.06 @ 122mph
The car dynoed 406rwhp and 378.6 rwt at 3400 lb.

I'm sure someone's gonna disagree with me for saying this but, <img border="0" alt="[bullshit]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_bs.gif" /> . At that weight, you'd need well over 475rwhp and significantly higher torque to manage that ET. With the mph and ET, it looks like the car either made more power/torque, or it's much lighter than stated. Those numbers just don't add up. Even with super low gearing and a completely flat torque curve, it doesn't make sense.

I'm not saying the car didn't run those numbers. I am saying it's either far lighter (2800 range) or it's making much more power/torque than we know.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Louis

iTrader: (7)

LG Motorsports Race Car

Visceral

iTrader: (1)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by G2 LS1:
<strong>LG Motorsports Race Car</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dammit.... I just made a mess in my pants.
And it only took 9.49 seconds. I feel like a teenager all over again. ;-)

Chris
(still around, still saving)

AlonzoVersion 1.0

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Trevor D:
<strong>Apparently you have not been following the cars here on LS1Tech.com very long. It DOES NOT take 475 RWHP to run 11.0's! I run 11.60's at over 3,500# with 360 RWHP, John Campbell (Raughammer) runs 10's with right at 400 RWHP (much lighter car), and we even have stock-internal autos running in the 11's with 320 RWHP or less, etc. I have been involved with LS1's since 1998, and my '98 TA ran 11.30's with a 3,640# raceweight and 398 RWHP. I would recommend that you check out the board's ET list that can be found in the drag racing section. Just ask any of the quick autos what they're dynoing and running at the track, and you'll see that it doesn't take near as much power to run a nice ET if the car is setup properly. I ran 12.0's in my SS with 315 RWHP, and I expect to run some 11.40's this fall with STOCK HEADS in some nice weather with a raceweight hovering in the 3,500# range. All it takes is the proper setup to make a car run.

Feel free to give me a call here at the shop if you would like to discuss this further. I would be glad to talk to you about setting your car up for the 1/4-mile. Again, it doesn't take near the amount of horsepower that most think to run quick, particularly with the automatics, when the car is setup for it. The owner of this car is supposed to be at the Southern Shootout in Louisiana on November 2nd, so maybe you can make it out then to check the car out for yourself. You could also buy an auto-equipped LS1, bring it to us, and let us perform some magic on it. Then you'll realize that the performance is easily repeatable when you have a complete package working together.

Trevor - LGM
(972) 272-7753

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by It'llrun:
<strong>11.06 @ 122mph
The car dynoed 406rwhp and 378.6 rwt at 3400 lb.

I'm sure someone's gonna disagree with me for saying this but, <img border="0" alt="[bullshit]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_bs.gif" /> . At that weight, you'd need well over 475rwhp and significantly higher torque to manage that ET. With the mph and ET, it looks like the car either made more power/torque, or it's much lighter than stated. Those numbers just don't add up. Even with super low gearing and a completely flat torque curve, it doesn't make sense.

I'm not saying the car didn't run those numbers. I am saying it's either far lighter (2800 range) or it's making much more power/torque than we know.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"></strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I liked the way you handled that Trevor.It could have easily went the other way.That kind of thing is what makes folks want to do business with LG even if you are a bit high priced <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />

It'llrun

I'm not saying, and I haven't said, the car didn't run 11.06@122mph. I absolutely do not believe it only made the rwhp and torque you said OR that it weighs so much (one or the other). That's not me trying to argue or anything. That's the way I see it. My car is already much faster than that car, so I don't need help tuning, but thanks for that offer. Maybe you guys are the luckiest on earth and all that is true but, reality says a car only making that power (400-410rwhp) and weighing 3400 lb. is only going to run in the 11.8-7's. That's a long way you've gotten by tuning and I choose not to believe it. EDIT: Sorry, but I think it's lighter than that.

<small>[ September 25, 2002, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: It'llrun ]</small>

Bad02WS6

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" /> LG Motorsports Race Car <img border="0" alt="[Burnout]" title="" src="graemlins/burnout.gif" />

White_Hawk

iTrader: (3)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by It'llrun:
<strong>I'm not saying, and I haven't said, the car didn't run 11.06@122mph.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The difference between a 1.50 60' time and a 1.80 (still a great 60') is also the difference between an 11.06 and an 11.66 quarter. Those are great numbers, and with the 60' she is pulling, very realistic numbers.

If you look at my sig, that is why I spent money on subframe connectors, Control arms, etc... before adding horsepower. I want to add power when it will HOOK.

-Geoff

Trevor @ Texas Speed & Perf.

iTrader: (3)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by It'llrun:
<strong>I'm not saying, and I haven't said, the car didn't run 11.06@122mph. I absolutely do not believe it only made the rwhp and torque you said OR that it weighs so much (one or the other). That's not me trying to argue or anything. That's the way I see it. My car is already much faster than that car, so I don't need help tuning, but thanks for that offer. Maybe you guys are the luckiest on earth and all that is true but, reality says a car only making that power (400-410rwhp) and weighing 3400 lb. is only going to run in the 11.8-7's. That's a long way you've gotten by tuning and I choose not to believe it. EDIT: Sorry, but I think it's lighter than that.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, I guess all of the A4's on the board have magical setups then. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> 400-410 RWHP with 3,400# WILL NOT net 11.7-11.8's! Maybe you missed the part where I'm running 11.6's with a 3,515# raceweight and 360 RWHP. How do you explain cars like PaiN's running 10.20's with 530 RWHP? Shouldn't he be running 11.0's with your math? What about Jason 98 TA that ran 10.60's with 487 RWHP at 3,450#? What about Nineball that ran 11.0's with his 382 all-bore with 455 RWHP? What about Terry Burger that ran 10.8's with 440 RWHP? I think real-world testing has disproved your fuzzy math. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" /> Again, it would be much easier for you to see the cars in person at the Southern Shootout on November 2nd. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />

Trevor - LGM

<small>[ September 25, 2002, 08:47 AM: Message edited by: Trevor D ]</small>

JS

iTrader: (4)

Lou I wasnt trying to discredit the setup
Its VERY IMPRESSIVE,Its just not stock weight...
3400lbs is light for these cars,Just my own opinion,and we all know that means doo doo.

Hell my car SHOULD be running low 11's/high 10's consistantly at 3500lbs but its not.Bottem line your setup is impressive and I give u guys a big <img border="0" alt="[hail]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_hail.gif" />

JS

BurnOut

iTrader: (1)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by It'llrun:
<strong>I'm not saying, and I haven't said, the car didn't run 11.06@122mph. I absolutely do not believe it only made the rwhp and torque you said OR that it weighs so much (one or the other). That's not me trying to argue or anything. That's the way I see it. My car is already much faster than that car, so I don't need help tuning, but thanks for that offer. Maybe you guys are the luckiest on earth and all that is true but, reality says a car only making that power (400-410rwhp) and weighing 3400 lb. is only going to run in the 11.8-7's. That's a long way you've gotten by tuning and I choose not to believe it. EDIT: Sorry, but I think it's lighter than that.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Jesus, man, do you venture all over the 'net spreading your sunshine?? First at MMC, and now here. Anyhow, the A4 cars run REAL damn hard with a converter in 'em. Travel back over to the MMC board and ask Evil all about it; let's see if I can remember this... internally stock, bolt-ons (headers, airbox lid, etc...), gears in the low 3.XX range (3.23's, maybe??), and a pretty healthy converter. Best run to date is an 11.99, though I can't remember the trap speed. So you think he's full of it, too?? You find it unbelievable that adding ported heads and a MUCH beefier cam could drop the ET by (nearly) a second?? In any event, the car that was mentioned in the beginning of this thread was dyno'd through an unlocked 4400 stall converter. You think that, I dunno, MAYBE that loose converter is soaking up some of the power??

It'llrun

Nevermind. I don't need a flame war over something this meaningless.

<small>[ September 25, 2002, 11:03 AM: Message edited by: It'llrun ]</small>

BurnOut

iTrader: (1)

Y2K- how quick is your car again?? Is it slower than a 9.49?? If so, then you have no room to be throwing any rainbows out there.

In any event, Lou has never made it a secret that he's not a drag racer. Never has been, and to my knowledge, has never had the inclination to be one. So you can cut a better light... BFD?? Which one of the two of you is going to be fastest in anything but a straight line?? Let's not forget that that is a road race car and the suspension is set up for carving corners, not hanging the front wheels in the air on launch.

In any event, I don't know what Lou did to **** in your Cheerios, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion. All I can say is that my opinion (and that of many others) of Lou is drastically different; not only as a person, but also as a business man. I have personally seen him go to lengths to correct things that are honestly not his problem in the name of customer service. If you've had a different experience with him or with LGM, well, ya can't please all of the people all of the time, and someone's gonna **** and moan no matter what ya do. The only suggestion that I have is that you go back up to LGM, you talk to Lou himself, and you keep an open mind while you do it.

Just my $.02...

Louis

iTrader: (7)

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Y2K_WS6_T/A:
<strong>Don't worry Lou, It's a love/hate relationship, I Love to Hate you. <img border="0" alt="[guns]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_guns.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mir, this is not the Texas Section on the "other" board. Dont pollute this thread OK! Thanks. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" />

LG Motorsports

No sweat JS.

LG

FASST

Man, the **** you guys get over trying to update potential customers of products they'll be happy with. I'm amaized builders even bother posting here.

Y2K_WS6_T/A

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by LG Motorsports:
<strong> By the way, what do you think My Daytona Corvette C5 tube frame car would do in the 1/4 mile?2500 lbs , 620rwhp @ 8200 rpms, 5 speed crash box with a 2.56 first, drag slicks, and a 4.88 gear. Peak torque is at 6700rpms.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">9.49 @ 138 mph with a rolling start. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[gay]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_rainbow.gif" />

Y2K_WS6_T/A

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by LG Motorsports:
<strong>But why is it that you all believe 431 rwhp from a Cam only stock head car, but you don't believe an 11.06 from a head and cam car built to the max, with ET Slicks?

I love the internet.

Lou Gigliotti
LG Motorsports</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <img border="0" alt="[gay]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_rainbow.gif" />

Don't worry Lou, It's a love/hate relationship, I Love to Hate you. <img border="0" alt="[guns]" title="" src="graemlins/gr_guns.gif" />